“Former JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trader Javier Martin-Artajo was released from police custody after telling a Madrid court he opposed attempts by U.S. prosecutors to extradite him on charges he hid trading losses that cost the bank $6.2 billion.

The former trader turned himself in yesterday morning after being contacted by investigators, a Spanish police official said. He was released after a hearing in Madrid yesterday in which he said he was unwilling to be extradited, according to a spokeswoman for the National Court.

The U.S. this month charged Martin-Artajo, a Spanish citizen, and Julien Grout, a French citizen, with trying to hide the losses stemming from trades by Bruno Iksil, the Frenchman at the center of the case who became known as the London Whale. Grout and Martin-Artajo face up to 20 years in jail if convicted of the most serious counts, including conspiracy and wire fraud.

“The likelihood is fairly significant that he would go back,” said Ivan Mercado, managing partner at Mercado & Rengel, a law firm in Spain that works on U.S. extradition cases. “Spain and the U.S. have an extradition agreement. He can’t just say he doesn’t want to go.”

Bank’s Negotiations

JPMorgan’s losses prompted investigations on two continents, U.S. congressional hearings and an internal review that led to a 50 percent pay cut for Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon, who the board said bore some responsibility for lapses. Regulators in the U.K. and U.S. are preparing to impose fines on the bank as soon as mid-September, a person with direct knowledge of the matter said last week.

The bank is in talks with various authorities to settle its part of the case for about $500 million to $600 million combined, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing unidentified people close to the situation. Not all agencies have agreed to numbers and the total may end up outside that range, it said.

Martin-Artajo, 49, oversaw trading strategy for Iksil’s synthetic portfolio at JPMorgan’s chief investment office in London, while Grout was a trader who worked for him.

“The arrested person is presumed responsible for manipulating and inflating the value of positions in the synthetic credit portfolio of his firm with the aim of achieving specific objectives of daily losses and gains,” Spanish police said in a statement.

‘Fair Reconstruction’

Martin-Artajo’s lawyer, Lista Cannon, didn’t respond to a call seeking comment on his client yesterday. He “is confident that when a complete and fair reconstruction of these complex events is completed, he will be cleared of any wrongdoing,” a spokeswoman for his law firm said earlier this month. Jennifer Zuccarelli, a spokeswoman for JPMorgan, declined to comment.

At a hearing yesterday, Martin-Artajo’s lawyer filed documents in which his client denied the allegations, according to a court official who asked not to be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. The U.S. now has 40 days to file sworn statements in support of its extradition request.

Martin-Artajo will then be able to contest those arguments at a further hearing before a judge decides whether to grant the request, said Mercado, who isn’t involved in the case. The process can take up to several months, he added.

‘Very Difficult’

“When there is a bilateral agreement between two countries on certain crimes, it’s very difficult for a country to refuse extradition because the accord implies the crime is viewed comparably,” Carlos Vazquez, a criminal lawyer and partner at Vazquez & Vazquez in Madrid, said by telephone.

The spokeswoman for the court said Martin-Artajo’s passport has been confiscated. Another court official said that wasn’t the case, but that he can’t leave Spain without court approval.

Grout is living in France and isn’t a fugitive, his lawyer, Edward Little, a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP in New York, said in an Aug. 12 interview, two days before his client was charged.

“He visited the U.S. last month with confidence he was not being indicted and moved to France to save money and look for a job,” Little said at the time. France has no obligation under its extradition treaty with the U.S. to send Grout to New York. Little declined to comment yesterday.

Martin-Artajo and Grout are charged with conspiring to falsify securities filings from March to May of 2012. The U.S. sought to keep the charges secret while arrests were attempted before unsealing them on Aug. 14. Jennifer Queliz, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, declined to comment.

‘Embarrassing Situation’

Dimon characterized the loss as “the stupidest and most embarrassing situation I have ever been a part of.” First disclosed in May 2012, the bad bets led to an earnings restatement, a U.S. Senate subcommittee hearing and probes by authorities including the Securities and Exchange Commission and U.K. Financial Conduct Authority.

Iksil, dubbed the “London Whale” because his portfolio was so large, signed a non-prosecution agreement with the U.S. in June, the government said. He pledged to cooperate with investigators as part of the deal. Martin-Artajo’s lawyer submitted documents with details of Iksil’s agreement with the U.S., the court official said yesterday.

The cases are U.S. v. Grout, 13-MAG-01976, and U.S. v. Martin-Artajo, 13-MAG-01975, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). The SEC case is Securities and Exchange Commission v. Martin-Artajo, 13-cv-05677, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).”

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

The Herald (heraldscotland.com) on May 16, 2013 released the following:

“A COMPUTER hacking teenager from Shetland will learn today if he is to be extradited to the United States given his core role in a series of damaging cyber attacks on the networks of the NHS, the FBI and major international corporations.

Jake Davis, 18, has admitted he and fellow members of LulzSec stole huge amounts of personal data belonging to hundreds of thousands of people and posted it online for anyone to download.

Southwark Crown Court in London heard yesterday that Davis, along with Ryan Ackroyd, Mustafa Al-Bassam and Ryan Cleary considered themselves “modern day pirates”, who carried out the attacks for entertainment.

All members of the group, which included a schoolboy and an ex-soldier, have pled guilty to carrying out various acts of cyber crime in 2011.

At a pre-sentencing hearing, prosecutor Sandip Patel said the men lacked the political drive of groups like Anonymous, from which they had developed, and seemed to have been doing it for kicks.

He said: “It’s clear from the evidence that they intended to achieve extensive national and international notoriety and publicity. They saw themselves as latter-day pirates.

“This is not about young immature men messing about. They are at the cutting edge of a contemporary and emerging species of criminal offender known as a cyber criminal.”

Smartly dressed Davis, 20, from Lerwick, who used the alias Topiary, smirked in the dock when details of his activities were outlined to the court. He was LulzSec’s main publicist and in charge of media relations.

Both he and Al-Bassam previously pled guilty to hacking and launching cyber attacks on organisations, including the CIA and the Serious Organised Crime Agency.

Davis’s barrister, Simon Mayo QC, told the court his client had completely turned his life around since being arrested.

Born in Canterbury, Kent, he moved to the Shetlands aged six with his mother to escape his alcoholic father, who later committed suicide. Socially isolated from his early teens, Davis suffered from depression and fell under the spell of a “misguided ideology”, Mr Mayo said.

But since his arrest, he had moved to London via Lincolnshire and found work with several artistic groups, also writing for the Observer about his time with Anonymous.

Carole Cadwalladr, a feature writer with the paper, provided a reference.

Michael Morris MBE, the co-director of art group Artangel, gave a character reference in court.

“In short, Davis has been given an opportunity he was previously denied, an opportunity to transform himself from a depressed 18-year-old in the Shetland Islands into a self-sufficient scriptwriter living in London,” Mr Mayo added, suggesting his client could be given a suspended sentence.

The court heard that the “DDoS” attacks they carried out with other unidentified hackers belonging to online groups such as Anonymous and Internet Feds flooded websites with traffic, making them crash and rendering them unavailable to users.

To do it, they used a remotely controlled network of “zombie” computers, known as a “botnet”, capable of being programmed to perform the attack.

The court heard the codes, written by Cleary, may have been using up to one million computers to carry out attacks via the internet without their owners knowing it.

The group only existed for a matter of months in 2011 before the main members were arrested between June and September, the court heard.

Attacks like those on Sony and Nintendo harvested massive amounts of private data. The Sony leak alone saw it lose details relating to 26.4 million customers, causing its Playstation network to shut down.

Davis was found to have 750,000 separate pieces of sensitive data on his computer after his arrest, and Cleary 10,000.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

“The Crown Prosecution Service has published new guidelines which say that people accused of crimes which cut across national boundaries should be tried in the country where most of the alleged offending occurred.

This comes weeks after it said it could not intervene in the extradition of two men who said their crimes were committed in the UK.

The document is part of the changes that are being introduced to how the UK deals with extradition arrangements with the United States and other nations.

The document and its recommended approach to these complex cases comes three weeks after two British men, Babar Ahmad and Talha Ahsan, failed to halt their extradition to the US despite arguing their alleged offences occurred in the UK.

I’ll come back to their case later – but first let’s look at the CPS’s guidelines. They’ve come into force as of now – but are subject to review following consultation in the weeks to come.

The problem the CPS is trying to solve is this: if both the UK and another nation want to prosecute someone for the same crime, where should that individual stand trial?

We are going to see increasing numbers of these kinds of cases in the years to come because globalisation has made it easier for crimes to be committed across borders, particularly where the internet is one of the tools used by offenders.

The new guidelines say that the starting point should be some kind of joint approach to investigation between two nations, so that law enforcement agencies in each country are clear what the other is doing and why. That relationship should include sharing information so that prosecutors can work out what charges someone can face in each jurisdiction.

It then says the following:

“So long as appropriate charges can properly be brought which reflect the seriousness and extent of the offending supported by admissible evidence, a prosecution should ordinarily be brought in the jurisdiction where most of the criminality or most of the loss or harm occurred.”

This charging decision should take into account the ability to get hold of relevant evidence held by the other country. Ultimately, says the CPS, the aim should be to have a single prosecution in just one of the countries where the suspect is wanted.

The document says there are other factors that can help to decide where someone should face prosecution, including the location of witnesses, the accused and co-accused.

US extraditions

So, back to the cases of Babar Ahmad and Talha Ahsan.

The pair were extradited to the United States on 5 October and are in jail in Connecticut, facing trial next year. Their extradition happened on the same day as the extradition of Abu Hamza so a lot of the detail got lost amid the focus on the jailed radical cleric.

They are accused of terrorism offences linked to a website which they have both confirmed they operated. The US authorities say the website supported mujihadeen and jihadists around the world, until it was closed in 2002. The men have entered not guilty pleas in court in the US and, during a BBC interview, Mr Ahmad said he opposed terrorism.

Babar Ahmad was first arrested by the Metropolitan Police in 2003 – and his trial is expected to include material seized by British officers in those searches. It’s possible that the US authorities will ask British detectives to appear as witnesses – as has happened in a linked trial involving an American citizen.

The US authorities will make plain in the trial that Mr Ahmad and Talha Ahsan (who was never arrested by British police) were operating the website in London. They claim jurisdiction because the website was technically served from computers in Connecticut and the indictment makes wider allegations of conspiracy with US nationals.

During their last ditch attempt to avoid extradition, lawyers for Babar Ahmad and Talha Ahsan pressed the CPS in court to clarify why there had never been a charge in the UK. The CPS said it considered some charges – but had insufficient evidence to prosecute.

Judges comprehensively threw out an attempt to privately prosecute the men, describing it as an attempt to thwart entirely legitimate extraditions to the US, approved by every court that had examined the applications. You can read their full judgement, which explains why the extraditions should go ahead, here.

The Home Secretary has already separately announced that she wants to see a new “forum bar” that would allow judges to block some extraditions where the UK is the most appropriate location for a trial.

Irrespective of where that leads, the question is whether the new CPS guidance would have stopped the two extraditions had it been in force three weeks ago?

The guidance seeks to avoid that conclusion by making clear that the CPS should not reopen a case after an extradition request has been made. In the Babar Ahmad case, prosecutors say they finished looking at the case before the US made its request.

But that won’t satisfy the tens of thousands of people (Muslims and otherwise) who signed petitions calling for this British pair to face British justice.”

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

“Not one US citizen has been extradited to Britain as a result of crimes said to have been committed in America since a controversial transatlantic treaty came into force, it has been disclosed.

By John-Paul Ford Rojas

Critics say it demonstrates the “lopsided” nature of the arrangement since Britions have been subject to US extradition orders as a result of their alleged actions in the UK.

The Home Office made the disclosure under Freedom of Information laws earlier this month.

It said: “From the information available, between January 2004 and 30 March 2012, there have been seven known US citizens extradited from the US to the UK.

“Of those seven, none have been identified as crimes which were committed whilst the person was in the US.”

Dominic Raab, Conservative MP for Esher and Walton, said: “This is more damning evidence of the lop-sided effect of out extradition arrangements with the US.

“Gary McKinnon, Christopher Tappin and Richard O’Dwyer are all subject to US extradition orders based on their actions in Britain.

“Yet, no American has ever been extradited for alleged offences committed on US soil. It smacks of double standards, and strengthens the case for extradition reform.”

Mr McKinnon has been fighting extradition over computer hacking charges for ten years while Mr Tappin was sent to the US earlier this year for alleged arms dealing. Mr O’Dwyer, a student, faces extradition for running a pirate film and TV website.

A US embassy spokeswoman said: “The US has never refused an extradition request from the UK for any type of crime under this treaty.

“The UK has refused 7 requests from the US. The facts clearly show that the treaty is fair and in no way lopsided.””

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

BOGOTA, Colombia — A drug trafficker who pioneered the use of submarines to smuggle cocaine has been captured in southwestern Colombia, the National Police said.

Jose Samir Renteria, who is the subject of a US extradition request, was arrested in Cali, the capital of Valle del Cauca province.

Renteria has links to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, guerrilla group and the Los Rastrojos gang, US officials said.

The suspect got involved in the illegal drug trade in the mid-1980s, when he allegedly began smuggling cocaine into the US using speedboats that operated out of Colombia’s Pacific coast.

Renteria became a partner of Neftali Umensa, one of the top leaders of the FARC’s 30th Front, who was killed by the army on Oct. 20.

US investigators determined that Renteria also had contacts and did business with Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel. Renteria, who is wanted on drug charges by a US federal court in Florida, is the subject of a Dec. 2, 2010, extradition request.

Colombian drug traffickers started using semi-submersibles in 1993. In that year, Colombia’s navy seized one of the vessels off Providencia Island in the Caribbean.

The semi-submersibles cannot dive like normal submarines, but are equipped with valves that, when opened by the operators, quickly flood the vessel, causing it and any drugs on board to quickly sink to an unrecoverable depth.

The crew then jumps overboard and, since no drugs are discovered, they avoid prosecution.

Since 1993, Colombian security forces have seized more than 50 of the vessels.

In September 2011, a sub with the capacity to haul at least 10 tons of drugs to Central America was seized from the FARC on Colombia’s southwestern Pacific coast by a police special operations unit.”

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

The High Court has dismissed an application to extradite former Worker’s Party president Sean Garland to the US for his alleged involvement in a sophisticated counterfeiting operation.

Mr Justice John Edwards said that the court was not disposed to grant the application and would furnish its reasons for doing so on 13th January next.

Authorities in the US had sought the extradition of Sean Garland (76), with an address at Brownstown, Navan, to face charges relating to the production of high-quality counterfeit US dollars. The operation was allegedly carried out in collusion with the government of North Korea.

In 2010, Garland went to the Supreme Court after the High Court rejected an application by his legal team seeking discovery of documents from the United States authorities, relating to his attempted extradition.

He is accused of being involved in distributing forged US money allegedly produced in North Korea. Former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signed an extradition request for the Brownstown resident.

Garland’s legal team wanted the US to produce the evidence they are basing their extradition request upon, but the High Court ruled that a precedent was set in a previous case and that it is not necessary to make the documentation available here.

Last year, Sean Garland told the Meath Chronicle that he was involved in the North Korean Friendship Society, of which he was chairman, and he had been there and visitors from there had been in Ireland.

During the 1970s and ’80s, he said he was very active in developing and expanding the Workers Party’s international contacts and activity. He played a major role in organising and supporting solidarity campaigns across a wide area of the world, including in south-east Asia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Angola, Mozambique, South Africa, and in Chile, Cuba, Guatemala, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, as well as Cyprus, Greece and Palestine.

He said these were some of the many places in the world where it was believed that United States foreign policy had inflicted great suffering, repression and untold deaths on people.

For decades, he said he had been a vocal and active critic of United States foreign policy.

He said he was never an enemy of the American people but a consistent opponent of the “right-wing reactionary policies” which have been pursued by US administrations over many decades.

Garland was first arrested in Belfast at a Workers Party conference in 2005, and again in Dublin in 2009 when he was in the city for medical treatment.

He said that the bail conditions which had been set were very onerous, including signing on at the local garda station in Navan, which has been reduced to four days a week, and not being able to stay out of the country for more than 48 hours.

Numerous politicians and local authorities have supported his campaign, as well as trade unions in Ireland and Britain.”

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.